LabVIEW

cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

How to match data in different array columns

There is something VERY WRONG with those case structures!  Notice the selector terminals?  They are inside the structure not in the boarder!!!!! CAUTION!


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
Message 11 of 18
(1,217 Views)

@jf13 wrote:

Sure! I'd be glad to.


A couple of beginners mistakes. You are spinning the outer loop like crazy doing nothing new. I would use an event structure. Also don't forget to set the user input to "limit to single line" so the word can be entered with the enter key.

 

Here's a quick rewrite using my code above. See if it works for you.

 

(Jeff, yes what's wrong with theses selectors???)

Message 12 of 18
(1,209 Views)

Heep Peek didn't barf or bark.  That's the first time I ever saw that!Smiley Surprised


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
0 Kudos
Message 13 of 18
(1,200 Views)

@JÞB wrote:

There is something VERY WRONG with those case structures!


Quick report here.

Message 14 of 18
(1,186 Views)

Works perfectly!

 

Thank you all very much for the assistance.

0 Kudos
Message 15 of 18
(1,169 Views)

@altenbach wrote:

@JÞB wrote:

There is something VERY WRONG with those case structures!


Quick report here.


I also reported to moderator to pull the attachments just in case that is contagious.


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
0 Kudos
Message 16 of 18
(1,152 Views)

Jeff·Þ·Bohrer wrote: I also reported to moderator to pull the attachments just in case that is contagious.

 Is there really such a thing as an infectious VI?

 

(Lets not talk about malicious "run when opened" code).

0 Kudos
Message 17 of 18
(1,135 Views)

@altenbach wrote:

Jeff·Þ·Bohrer wrote: I also reported to moderator to pull the attachments just in case that is contagious.

 Is there really such a thing as an infectious VI?

 

(Lets not talk about malicious "run when opened" code).


Back about a decade ago I did have a typedef go insane.  Yes, our code was probably overcoupled and the dypedef auto-updated just the way it was supposed to throughout the entire lab and all our development machines.  it was a mess! every time we cleaned it up on one machine another would re-commit the insane object and round and round we went.  We eventually restored everything from a weekly backup to nuke that darn thing (losing several hundred man-hours of work in the process.)  Most of the group lost commit rights to "Core" code areas in the source control system about then.  We learned that lesson well.

 

So, when I see things like that I tend to be cautious. 


"Should be" isn't "Is" -Jay
Message 18 of 18
(1,121 Views)